conebeckham wrote:Username, I think you're mistaking the "path(s) of Dzogchen" for the "State of Dzogchen," which is what Namdrol is talking about.

No you are engaing in damage limitation by falsifying the subject in support of your friend again. The Urgyen Karmapa which I have faith in as a genuine tulku of the last glorious one, always emphasizes being truthful which is what I think his true devotees like me should also do. They were talking about "teachings" which he declared a false monolithic statement on & what I quoted & meant:

Malcolm wrote:

catmoon wrote:Okay, then they should all be in perfect agreement in their teachings.

Dzogchen masters are, when it comes to discussing Dzogchen.

username wrote:

Malcolm wrote:

catmoon wrote:Okay, then they should all be in perfect agreement in their teachings.

Dzogchen masters are, when it comes to discussing Dzogchen.

So if it was Dzongsar Khyentse tulku & Khenpo Choga as stated here we see the above statement by Malcom is false as there are disagreements since Dzongsar Khyentse Rinpoche is a Dzogchen master though he teaches it not publicly but to a few close disciples specially after certain retreats he supervises.

Further, there are disagreements amongst Dzogchen masters on the necessity for ngondro as we all know well. So a second reason why Malcom's pronouncement is wrong on this very basic assumption on Dzogchen. Whether you follow ChNN or Dzongsar Khyentse Rinpoche, you should have faith in their teachings and not otherwise online from others.

catmoon wrote:Okay, then they should all be in perfect agreement in their teachings.

Dzogchen masters are, when it comes to discussing Dzogchen.

I think that "when it comes to discussing Dzogchen," as the State, the Basis, whatever you want to call it, they will be in agreement. Malcolm did not claim that all Dzogchen masters are in perfect agreement in their teachings. Thus, the clause after the comma. Seems pretty clear to me, but then again, I'm not on a mission to prove someone heretical, or out to destroy Buddhism, or out to create a new "Dzogchenism," much less an Orwellian state.

Seriously, man......read it again, and the meaning is clear.

May any merit generated by on-line discussionBe dedicated to the Ultimate Benefit of All Sentient Beings.

Username, what List? You are seriously off the deep end....what the Karmapa has to do with Malcolm's statement about Dzogchen is beyond me. It's clear, of course, what Karmapa has to do with me, for anyone who knows me or has followed me, here at Dharma Wheel or elsewhere, and your mention of His Holiness in this context is clearly meant to be some sort of "chastisement" of my words or position. Ridiculous.

Username, for the record, the Dalai Lama himself, whom His Holiness Orgyen Tinley Dorje reveres, has recently stated that "religion," as institution(s), is no longer adequate. I am positive His Holiness Orgyen Tinley Dorje agrees with this position.

I also believe this position is reflective of what Malcolm has been saying. Do you find fault with His Holiness The Dalai Lama's position? (See, two can play at this game, eh?)

Let me be crystal clear: My position is that the Truth, salvific awareness, whatever you want to call it, is the central nature and right of all sentient beings, not merely Buddhists. I believe Buddhism, as a system of practices, or rather Dharma as found in "Buddhism"-to use Malcolms' distinction, is the best path for me. I also see and understand the value of conventional, institutional religious structures, organizations, etc., including that of CNNR, who, it must be said, has developed quite a unique institution. But the value of such things is not "adequate," to borrow a word, if it does not stress the primacy of salvific awareness. To the extent that "religious institutions" help foster awakening sentient beings to that salvific awareness, I am happy to support "religions." However, I have no compunction criticizing institutions, including religions, who promote elitism, greed, selfishness, conformity, blind faith/belief, wrong views, etc.

Regarding your "tangent:" I also, for the record, have faith and confidence in His Holiness Orgyen Tinley Dorje. But I have issues with the "Tulku System" as well. These two statements do not contradict each other in the slightest. Do you understand this?

May any merit generated by on-line discussionBe dedicated to the Ultimate Benefit of All Sentient Beings.

I wish for all diversity to remain not be evolved out and exteminated as major extremist right wingers said and in effect desired. The records are there and there will be more blogs. Also we still have the gurus as ultimate arbiter who love the Dalai lama and karmapa tulku lineages and will not allow themselves or sanghas to be misrepresented by a few online.

Last edited by username on Thu Oct 04, 2012 9:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Actually HH Karmapa Urgyen Trinley Dorje puts a lot of effort into "secular" activities of benefit, so I think his actions show he is trying to emulate His Holiness the Dalai Lama's words in this regard. There are environmental projects at the main Karma Kamtshang monasteries, interactions on a secular platform with university students, and activities to provide modern education in monastic schools.My personal belief if that HH the Dalai Lama and HH Karmapa are like the sun and moon that bring light to sentient beings. Whether it is the light of liberation, or the light of warmth to lift the suffering of a little bit of cold- they will use any method to do that. In order to benefit the non-Buddhist human beings of this world, they teach ethics in a secular framework.

In order to ensure my mind never comes under the power of the self-cherishing attitude,I must obtain control over my own mind. Therefore, amongst all empowerments, the empowerment that gives me control over my mind is the best,and I have received the most profound empowerment with this teaching.-Atisha Dipamkarabrtsal ba'i bkhra drin

Do you seriously think that my piddling opinions have the weight to destroy centuries of world culture?

Are you so deluded as to think that you are saving the masses (your words in another post) in some grand scheme derived from Plato's Republic where you, "having renounced your religion" (again, your words), a philospher king (with advanced western academic degrees, yawn) are preserving religious palliatives for the ignorant masses until such time as they can become Buddhists?

You are on such a tear about my insignificant opinions thay you have made yourself look ridiculous.